I was just killing some time surfing the web and I went over to IGN's PS3 site and to my surprise they had a review of God of War III. I read the whole thing and they heap praise on it, saying it's an incredible action game, one of the best LOOKING games ever (especially Kratos himself), etc. However, they also said it had a few narrative issues and some character models don't look as good as they could, and in some parts the lighting wasn't as great as it is in other spots of the game. I finally got to the end of the review. Their score? A 9.3/10. I think this is a fair score, considering how much they liked it, but at the same time, taking into account that there were some things they didn't like so much or things that they thought needed work.
Immediately after this, I went over to Metacritic to check if there were other scores posted and there are quite a few. I just read the very first one, a 100/100 from Playstation Magazine, and this is what the tiny caption says: "God of War III is beautiful. It's bloody. It's brilliant. But it's not perfect." There's no link provided to read their whole review, or else I would, but this just bothered me. Why would you give a game a 100/100 (a PERFECT score) if you admit in your review summary that the game ISN'T perfect? Stupidity? Unconditional, blind love for a really solid Playstation exclusive (as it turns out, no, because there are 7 other reviews which give it a 100/100)?
Here's a comment from another review that gave it 100/100 (Gamervision) that I feel is slightly more appropriate: "Kratos is given a wonderfully epic farewell that would truly be a shame to miss, and every aspect of the game, from the controls, to the combat, to the presentation, is as close to perfect as perfect can be." Even with this one, though, they still only say that it's CLOSE to perfect.
Thoughts? What do you think of reviews? Do you trust them? Why do you think reviewers need to give games such high scores even when they have problems?
Lastly, are there any games that YOU think are perfect? A game, where if you had to review it professionally, you would give it 100/100?
As I was writing this, I kept thinking of a certain game that I actually would give a 100/100. Sorry (Amateria) that I'm probably putting what you would put, but I would give the honor to The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past. As I think back on the many times I've played it, I can't think of a single thing I DON'T like about it. There's NOTHING wrong with it.
Another one for me is Mega Man 2. It's one of the first games I remember playing a lot and mastering, and I can't think of a single thing wrong with it. Perfect controls, awesome music, challenging but never unfair, a classic.
I'll try to think of some more recent games, but in the meantime, I'm anxious to hear what anyone else thinks.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I've been thinking about it for a couple of hours now. I may edit this post or re-post later after seeing some other responses, but for now, my only perfect score will go to Metroid Prime.
ReplyDeleteI'm gonna have to go with Carpartz on this one. Metroid Prime is the only game I've played that really felt lacking in nothing. Everything done about it was flawless.
ReplyDeleteThere are other games that I like more, but as far as perfect scores go Metroid Prime takes the cake.
Metroid Prime 2 sucked IMHO...heart breaker.
I actually thought about that one, too, but I wasn't a huge fan of backtracking to get all those artifacts that you need to open up the path to the final area. Everything else about it though...excellent.
ReplyDeleteAnd Metroid Prime 2 didn't SUCK, it just wasn't as good as the first. Jeesh.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGame reviews online like IGN and mags like Game Informer seem to do a pretty good job. Times when I have picked up games and ignored the reviewers is when I have gotten burned. Indiana Jones and the Staff of Kings and Lord of the Rings Conquest are two recent titles that burned me because I said I'm a LOTR and Indy fan and I'll like em. Terrible games! Should have listened. I think as long as you understand what style of game you like reviews can be helpful. Reading what you guys post on this blog has been helpful too, it's nice to have some real people give feedback.
ReplyDeleteOne I've always loved, and probably my first two player vs experience is Super Dodgeball for the NES. Silly I know but you could pick different teams and they all had balance through different moves and throws. So it came down to the skill of the player. We played that forever as kids. I still play it occasionally. Not high tech but tons of fun.
I'm a bit of a sucker for reviews, if the reviews say it's good then that generally sways my own opinion on the matter...as quakeroates points out tho they usually get it right, and i tend to read 2 or 3 different reviews to get a broader scope of opinions of the game in question. Personally i use computerandvideogames.com as my first stop for all reviews, they give it how it is, there's no bias towards a particular system and their reviews are always a nice read, sometimes with a bit of humour thrown in. good website in general. That and Kotakus reviews, i like their format, the what we liked/dislike sections are a nice addition.
ReplyDeleteAs for a perfect 10/10 game i'm gonna have to go with...Half Life, stunning game for in it's time, it might not now quite stand up against some of the the big hitters today but i'd still take it over half the rubbish that comes out.
I'm a little late to the conversation on this one, but I'll give it a go anyways.
ReplyDeleteI try not to subscribe to a numerically based review system. It's not that it isn't nice to see a good high score with a game we love, but there isn't any rubric or guide for us to use, so the number only means something in terms of the other numbers surrounding it (i.e. games released in the same time period)
Although Link of the Past is one of my deepest gaming loves, I don't think I could call it perfection (it's just not fair). It does do many things better than other Zelda games though. I'm thinking of specifically it's ability to give the player some guidelines on how to continue the adventure without making it linear and boring. I also like how the boundaries of where you can go in the world are blocked off by not having enough of the items to continue, so the desire to explore is built into the desire to complete the next dungeon - I never really felt that the two concepts were at odds. I could go on for days about that game...
I think I prefer reviews in the Kotaku style. Listing things Loved and Hated, allowing the reader to get a strong feel of what a real person responds to the game. That's not to say that all numerical-style reviewers out there don't critically think about the experience, but I think the number at the end that summarizes the whole experience is too tempting, and we don't effectively analyze the points in the article honestly after we indulge in the "score."
Oh, and Gears of War is perfect. That's the one I pick. "Dom..."
Final Fantasy Tactics... one of my all time favorite games that has never been equaled in its mix of RPG and strategy. Posting here about it will make me go back and play it too. I think they made some sequels or whatever but they were on the DS! What a load of crap!
ReplyDeleteHalf-Life 2 is another perfect game that I have played through 5 or 6 times now...